The rule of law governing search and seizure is the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution which states, in part, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause…” The constitution does not provide definition of what constitutes an unreasonable search and seizure, nor does it define the term effects as it pertains to the venue being searched in this instance. Thus, case law interpreting these provisions must be analyzed to determine the protection of a person in their mobile home as it was not considered during the amendment’s creation. The initial case interpreting the Fourth
…show more content…
By neglecting the opportunity to observe the mobile home for ongoing criminal activity, law enforcement deemed the anonymous tip appropriate evidence to conduct a search, and proceeded to do so. The case of Navarette v. California, 572 U.S. __ (2014) further analyzes the weight of credibility from an anonymous tip, while also noting the importance of surrounding circumstances. An anonymous tip led to observance of a vehicle that indeed seemed to be operated recklessly, when police officers stopped the vehicle, then later deemed the scent of marijuana probable cause and searched it. This case deemed reliability proven through ongoing circumstances sufficient as the right to stop due to reasonable suspicion, but did not establish probable cause based on its own merit. The right to search stemmed solely from the scent of marijuana instead, being established by State v. Greenwood 301 N.C. 705 (1981) as probable cause. This is strengthened in the case of Johnson v. Texas 146 S.W. 3d 719 (2004) as the court held that an anonymous tip alone does not constitute probable cause, reviewing the search of narcotics in an automobile following an anonymous tip being made. The court held that a corroborating anonymous tip justified the initial stop of the vehicle, but the actual search was unwarranted based on a lack of probable cause. An anonymous tip justifies the investigatory detention of a suspect, but without exigent circumstances, lacks the credibility to rightfully search and individual’s person or
By neglecting the opportunity to observe the mobile home for ongoing criminal activity, law enforcement deemed the anonymous tip appropriate evidence to conduct a search, and proceeded to do so. The case of Navarette v. California, 572 U.S. __ (2014) further analyzes the weight of credibility from an anonymous tip, while also noting the importance of surrounding circumstances. An anonymous tip led to observance of a vehicle that indeed seemed to be operated recklessly, when police officers stopped the vehicle, then later deemed the scent of marijuana probable cause and searched it. This case deemed reliability proven through ongoing circumstances sufficient as the right to stop due to reasonable suspicion, but did not establish probable cause based on its own merit. The right to search stemmed solely from the scent of marijuana instead, being established by State v. Greenwood 301 N.C. 705 (1981) as probable cause. This is strengthened in the case of Johnson v. Texas 146 S.W. 3d 719 (2004) as the court held that an anonymous tip alone does not constitute probable cause, reviewing the search of narcotics in an automobile following an anonymous tip being made. The court held that a corroborating anonymous tip justified the initial stop of the vehicle, but the actual search was unwarranted based on a lack of probable cause. An anonymous tip justifies the investigatory detention of a suspect, but without exigent circumstances, lacks the credibility to rightfully search and individual’s person or